本周的《市场周刊》播客于9月5日录制，讨论了两个主要话题：美联储政策的最新进展以及全球债券收益率的飙升。 关于美联储政策，发言人指出，上周主席沃尔什似乎在杰克逊霍尔会议上承诺了9月份的加息。然而，联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）中其他有影响力的声音，尤其是理事沃勒，表达了更为鸽派的观点。纽约联储主席约翰·威廉姆斯，被发言人描述为“被普遍认为是白痴”，在一次采访中表示通胀将在未来一到两年内达到2%。发言人将这一持续的预测归因于威廉姆斯是一位拥有博士学位的经济学家，他的模型是基于通胀目标制央行构建的，这使得他的预测总是指向2%的目标，尽管多年来都没有准确过。威廉姆斯不主张加息，但很可能会追随美联储主席的领导。 理事沃勒，被认为比沃尔什更有影响力，发表了被认为比他之前鹰派立场更为鸽派的言论。尽管他表示如果消费者物价指数（CPI）数据过热，他会支持9月加息，但沃勒强调了通胀趋势的改善，尤其是在核心通胀方面，并暗示由于关税影响的消退，可能出现一个“转折点”。他还提到了个人消费支出（PCE）计算方法即将发生的变化，其中“投资组合管理费”（随股市上涨而增加）将被移除，预计这将导致PCE下降0.2%。沃勒主张“给通胀下降一个机会”，建议等待一次会议。发言人认为沃勒关于“等待成本”的论点并不真诚，指出如果跳过9月，下一次加息很可能会推迟到12月，因为10月临近中期选举，这引发了对政治干预的担忧。 沃尔什发表演讲后，市场预期9月加息的可能性为60%，但在沃勒发表讲话后，这一可能性降至五五开。然而，本周公布的非农就业数据出人意料地强劲，显示新增就业超过15万，失业率为4.1%，将加息的可能性再次推高到略低于60%。尽管劳动力市场表现强劲，劳动参与率有所改善，但工资加速增长的迹象尚未显现。发言人指出，中东冲突推动的油价和能源价格上涨，对通胀，尤其是整体消费者物价指数（CPI），构成显著的上行风险，这可能进一步增强9月加息的理由。即将公布的消费者物价指数（CPI）数据被视为至关重要。 第二个主要话题是全球债券收益率的飙升，10年期收益率接近4.8%，30年期收益率也出现上涨。发言人强调，理解市场波动需要理解不同的看法和投资者限制，而非固定的公式。 讨论了几种关于收益率上升的流行解释： 1. **赤字失控：** 美国财政赤字达6%，全球政府赤字也在上升，这增加了主权债务供应和经济活动，从而推高了收益率。发言人反驳说，美国有简单的解决方案，例如提高税收，与G7其他国家相比，美国的税收相对较低。然而，其他国家财政空间较小。 2. **超大规模公司/科技挤出效应：** 大型科技公司正为人工智能建设大量借贷，可能将投资从国债中分流。发言人对此不以为然，认为投资者不受固定现金量的限制，可以利用杠杆，尤其是在国债流动性高且有回购市场的情况下。 3. **经济强劲增长：** 纽约联储主席威廉姆斯将收益率上升归因于美国经济强劲，特别是人工智能和科技投资，将其视为经济实力的体现而非逆风。发言人认为这很“愚蠢”，指出美国经济增长（1.5-2%）并非异常强劲，而且收益率上升的全球性特征意味着这不可能仅仅是美国的故事。 4. **期限溢价：** 央行政策和通胀未来走向的不确定性，导致投资者要求更高的补偿。考虑到全球经济模式和国内政治的变化，发言人认为这是一个“完全合理”的解释。 发言人认为全球债券收益率飙升“最能解释”的原因是**中东战争推动的能源价格上涨**。他观察到伊朗战争的爆发、油价上涨以及债券收益率提高之间存在直接关联。这种影响在欧洲等高度依赖中东能源的国家更为显著，尽管美国也受到了影响。发言人认为，如果冲突得到解决，债券收益率可能会大幅下降，使其他解释显得“微不足道”。他承认战争结束的时间不确定，并指出政治人物预计战争可能会持续到中期选举。然而，他暗示美国总统可能会“收买伊朗人”，以阻止民主党在中期选举中可能出现的“惨败”。

This week's Markets Weekly podcast, recorded on September 5th, discusses two primary topics: recent developments in Federal Reserve policy and the global surge in bond yields. Regarding Fed policy, the speaker notes that last week, Chair Walsh seemed to promise a September hike at Jackson Hole. However, other influential voices on the FOMC, particularly Governor Waller, presented more dovish views. New York Fed President John Williams, described by the speaker as "widely regarded as an idiot," stated in an interview that inflation would reach 2% in one or two years. The speaker attributes this consistent forecast to Williams being a PhD economist whose models are built on inflation targeting central banks, making his predictions always lead to a 2% target, despite not being correct for years. Williams is not advocating for rate hikes but would likely follow the Fed chair's lead. Governor Waller, seen as more influential than Walsh, delivered remarks perceived as much more dovish than his previous hawkish stance. While open to a September hike if CPI came in hot, Waller emphasized improving inflation trends, particularly in core inflation, and suggested a "turning point" due to fading tariff effects. He also highlighted an upcoming change in PCE calculation, where "portfolio management fees" (which rise with the stock market) will be removed, expecting a 0.2% decline in PCE. Waller advocated for "giving disinflation a chance," suggesting waiting one meeting. The speaker found Waller's "cost of waiting" argument disingenuous, pointing out that skipping September would likely push the next hike to December, due to the proximity of October to the midterms, raising concerns about political interference. Following Walsh's speech, the market priced in a 60% chance of a September hike, which dropped to 50-50 after Waller's remarks. However, a surprisingly strong non-farm payrolls print this week, showing over 150,000 jobs created and an unemployment rate of 4.1%, pushed the odds back up to just under 60%. While the labor market showed strength and improved labor force participation, wage acceleration was not yet apparent. The speaker noted that rising oil and energy prices, fueled by Middle Eastern conflicts, pose significant upside risks to inflation, particularly headline CPI, which could further strengthen the argument for a September hike. The upcoming CPI print is seen as crucial. The second major topic is the surge in global bond yields, with the 10-year yield approaching 4.8% and 30-year yields also rising. The speaker emphasizes that understanding market movements involves understanding different perceptions and investor constraints, rather than fixed equations. Several popular explanations for rising yields are discussed: 1. **Runaway deficits:** The U.S. has a 6% fiscal deficit, and global government deficits are rising, increasing sovereign debt supply and economic activity, thus pushing yields higher. The speaker counters that the U.S. has easy solutions, such as raising taxes, which are relatively low compared to other Western countries. Other nations, however, have less fiscal space. 2. **Hyperscalers/tech crowding out:** Big tech companies are borrowing heavily for AI buildout, potentially diverting investment from Treasuries. The speaker dismisses this, arguing that investors are not constrained by fixed cash amounts and can leverage up, especially with highly liquid Treasuries and the repo market. 3. **Strong economic growth:** New York Fed President Williams attributed higher yields to a strong U.S. economy, particularly in AI and tech investments, viewing it as a reflection of economic strength rather than a headwind. The speaker finds this "silly," noting that U.S. growth (1.5-2%) isn't exceptionally strong, and the global nature of rising yields means it can't solely be a U.S. story. 4. **Term premium:** Uncertainty in the future path of central bank policy and inflation leads investors to demand higher compensation. The speaker finds this a "totally reasonable" explanation given changes in the global economic model and domestic politics. The speaker's "most responsive" explanation for the surge in global bond yields is **energy prices driven by the Middle Eastern war**. He observes a direct correlation between the start of the Iran war, rising oil prices, and increasing bond yields. This impact is more pronounced in countries like Europe, which are highly dependent on Middle Eastern energy, though the U.S. is also affected. The speaker believes that if the conflict resolves, bond yields would likely fall significantly, rendering other explanations "trivial." He acknowledges uncertainty about the war's end, noting that political figures anticipate it potentially lasting through the midterms. However, he suggests the U.S. President might "buy the Iranians out" to prevent a potential Democratic "blowout" in the midterms.